Search This Blog

The Nineteenth Prefectural Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey convened in Fukushima City, Fukushima Prefecture, on May 18, 2015, releasing the latest results of thyroid examination, consisting of Initial Screening or the first round screening (originally scheduled to be conducted from October 2011 to March 2014, but actually still ongoing) and Full-Scale Screening or the second round screening (beginning April 2014). It has been 3 months since the last committee meeting on February 12, 2015, and the latest results include 3 more months worth of data confirmed as of March 31, 2015.An official English translation of the results is now available here.
As of March 31, 2015, there are 16 more (12 from the first round and 4 from the second round) confirmed cancer cases, all papillary thyroid cancer, and 9 more (2 from the first round and 7 from the second round) newly suspicious cases. The number of confirmed cancer cases now totals 103 (98 from the first round and 5 from the second-round), and 23 more await surgical confirmation. (The number of suspicious/malignant is officially 127, including the single case of post-surgically confirmed benign nodules).Initial Screening (the first round screening) targeted about 368,000 individuals who were age 18 and younger, residing in Fukushima Prefecture at the time of the Tokyo Electric Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident on March 11, 2011. Full-Scale Screening (the second round screening), to be conducted every 2 years until age 20 and every 5 years after age 20, additionally targets those who were born in the first year after the accident, aiming to examine approximately 385,000 individuals in a 2-year period.
Officials are still accepting first-time subjects in the first round screening in an attempt to raise the participation rate, allowing those who haven't yet undergone Initial Screening to participate in it so long as they have not received a notification letter for Full-Scale Screening. As a result, 966 more, or 81.5% of the eligible underwent the primary ultrasound examination, either in Fukushima Prefecture or in other prefectures where they have relocated to. This is 0.3% more than the results released on February 12, 2015, and gave rise to the 2 newly suspicious cases. Although no individual information was released, a comparison of the latest results to the previous results from February 2015 reveals that they are both women, one from Iwaki City and the other from Aizu Wakamatsu City, whose ages were 11 and 18 at the time of the accident, and at least one of the two had a tumor diameter of 45.0 mm.
The second round screening results include a table showing how the test results changed from the Initial Screening to the Full-Scale Screening. The column called "Non-participants" shows 7,072 subjects who never underwent the first-round screening but went through the second-round screening. It seems more logical to include the above 2 cases in the "Non-participants" category of the second-round screening, rather than in the first-round screening.
It is notable that the number of suspicious/malignant cases in the second-round screening nearly doubled, from 8 to 15, in the three months since the February report. The number of subjects participating in the confirmatory examination increased by about 60%, and the number of confirmed results nearly doubled with the number of biopsy increasing by 150%. So it is in a way not surprising the number of suspicious/malignant cases warranting surgical confirmation increased. Moreover, it is a concern that a little over half of those eligible for the confirmatory examination actually were examined, which means the number of suspicious/malignant cases are projected to increase even more as the progress rate of the confirmatory examination increases.
Again the details of the additional 7 cases newly determined to be suspicious/malignant after biopsy are not specified in detail, but comparison with the previous results reveals they include 2 males (ages 12 and 14 at the time of the accident) and 5 females (ages 8, 14, 17, 17 and 18 at the time of the accident). The average tumor diameter for the suspicious/confirmed cases in the second-round decreased slightly from 10.2 mm to 9.1 mm with the maximum diameter remaining the same, suggesting most newly diagnosed cases had tumor diameters on the smaller end. Their first round screening results include 3 cases each of A1 and A2, and a case of B. The places of their residence at the time of the accident include the FY 2011 target municipalities of Minamisoma City and Date City and the FY 2012 target municipalities of Fukushima City (4 cases) and Nihonmatsu City. According to the previous results (Jan 2012, May 2012), most of the Minamisoma City residents had Initial Screening by the end of December 2011, and the Date City residents were screened in Jan-March 2012, whereas Initial Screening began in May 2012 in Fukushima City and in September 2012 in Nihonmatsu City. Although biopsy results were confirmed in these 7 cases sometime between January and March 2015, it is not clear exactly when they underwent the primary examination of the Full-Scale Screening which began in April 2014. Given the limited amount of information, it is not possible to identify where the previously A1 cases lived, who apparently had no ultrasound findings in Initial Screening. It means they likely developed the tumor in a little over 2 years since the last screening, and about 3 years after the accident.
The Interim Summary of the Thyroid Examination Evaluation Subcommittee meeting, held on March 24, 2015, was reviewed during this committee meeting, as the Subcommittee meeting apparently wrapped up its session as of the March meeting at the end of FY 2014*. The Subcommittee came to a conclusion that the current situation where 99 of 112 suspicious/malignant cases had surgeries and 98 were confirmed with thyroid cancer (95 papillary thyroid cancer and 3 poorly differentiated cancer) clearly represents an excess incidence of pediatric thyroid cancer increased over the Japanese prevalence rate by an order of magnitude (At the November 11, 2014 subcommittee meeting, it was described as "61 times"). Amongst several issues addressed, the interim summary states that this increase can be a result of either excess occurrence due to radiation exposure or over-diagnosis, and that there were opinions amongst the subcommittee members that the current scientific knowledge does not completely deny the former, yet the latter was more likely. It goes on to state, "At the current time, it is not possible to conclude if thyroid cancer cases detected during the screening are radiation-induced. The results of the Initial Screening suggest that it is unlikely these cases are the effect of radiation exposure, considering that the exposure dose is far less than the Chernobyl accident and that there have been no cancer cases in children younger than 5 at the time of the accident. However, a long-term, ongoing study is needed in order to evaluate the effect of radiation exposure. Moreover, the early internal exposure dose from radioactive iodine is extremely critical in assessing the effect of the accident. The screening should continue in conjunction with the dose estimation study. "
Meanwhile, attendees and webcast viewers were surprised to find out that Shinichi Suzuki, a Fukushima Medical University thyroid surgeon who was in charge of the Fukushima Thyroid Examination was replaced with Akira Otsuru, an internist and a professor in the Department of Radiation Health Management at Fukushima Medical University. Otsuru, formerly of Nagasaki University, was one of the first to go to Fukushima Prefecture immediately after the accident as a head of the radiation medicine team sent from Nagasaki University. Otsuru was clearly not knowledgeable about surgical details of the cases as Suzuki was, although a lot of details were not released by Suzuki citing patient confidentiality anyway. During the committee meeting as well as the press conference afterwards, Otsuru often did not seem to comprehend questions from other committee members or journalists. There was already an issue of data management and transparency with Suzuki withholding some data from the committee, prioritizing presentations at academic meetings. With the assignment of Otsuru and absence of Suzuki at the committee, there appeared to be a setback of information disclosure and transparency.****************
A summary of results are provided below for Initial Screening and Full-Scale Screening, followed by unofficial translation of selective tables from the results. All numbers shown below are from the data analysis as of March 31, 2015.Initial Screening (October 2011 - ongoing)Total number targeted: 367,685Number of participants in primary examination: 299,543Number with confirmed results: 299,233

A1 154,018 (51.5%) (no nodules or cysts found)

A2 142,936 (47.8%) (nodules ≦ 5.0 mm or cysts ≦ 20.0 mm)

B 2,278 (0.8%) (nodules ≧ 5.1 mm or cysts ≧ 20.1 mm)

C 1 (0.0%) (requiring immediate secondary examination)

(Note: Cysts with solid components are treated as nodules).

Number eligible for secondary examination: 2,279

Number of participants in confirmatory (secondary) examination: 2,096

Number with confirmed results : 2,034

Number of fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC): 529

Number suspicious or confirmed of malignancy: 112 (including one case of benign nodules)

*Japanese governmental committees run on fiscal year schedules--April to March of the following year--and seem to be required to produce some sort of report, often called an "interim summary," which are essentially the final report. Although it wasn't clearly announced, it seemed to be understood during the March session that the Subcommittee would not meet again and the interim summary would be forwarded to the next session of its parent committee, the Prefectural Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fukushima Thyroid Examination Fact Sheet:
September 2017✴Copying or re-posting part or whole of this post is not permitted. Please link to this post instead.

Note: Corrections were made in the following paragraphs in pink color on October 17, 2017.Second paragraph in section "Screening protocol"First paragraph in section "Thyroid cancer cases"First paragraph in section "Transparency and integrity of data"Second paragraph in subsection "1. A limited time interval after the accident" in section "Official stance on radiation effects"Fourth paragraph in subsection "2. Very low doses" in section "Official stance on radiation effects"

Note: A shorter version of this fact sheet has been e-published on the website of Kagaku by the Iwanami Publishers. It can be downloaded from this link. Citation in AMA style is as follows: Hiranuma Y. Fukushima thyroid examination fact sheet: September 2017. Kagaku. 2017;87(9):e0001-e0011.

The Interim Report released in March 2016 by the Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey called for the need to establish the rules of management and provision of the data so it can be widely utilized by domestic and international experts. Accordingly, the Subcommittee to Review Provision of Data for the Purpose of Academic Research met in Fukushima City, Fukushima, for the first time on May 31, 2016. Subcommittee members were selected by the Fukushima prefectural government in order to address the role of the subcommittee in establishing technical rules in provision of data and include specialists in epidemiology, information technology, law, and legal sociology. Also included are members of the Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey, Shoichiro Tsugane and Hokuto Hoshi, and the Health Survey Support Department Head and the Department of Epidemiology Chair at Fukushima Medical University, Tetsuya Ohira, representing the Fukushima Health Managemen…